I went over to digital cameras in 1998, and have never looked back, even though my first camera had just dreadful* image quality compared to film. The speed and flexibility was just too seducing.
But in case you're interested, here's an article comparing film and digital.
*The resolution of the Nikon Coolpix 600 was not even one megapixel (it was 768x1024), and even viewed at that size the noise and lack of sharpness was not even as good as the old 110 Instamatic cameras, or a Polaroid picture. But back then it was new and amazing.
The linked gallery is also a bite of history. I lived in Edinburgh in 2000 in a sublet apartment. I did all my work, including image processing and so on, on an Apple laptop. A simple life, and new and exciting.
I later got a Nikon 950, 2MP and a big step up, and a Canon Ixus, also 2MP, very compact and very good.
6 comments:
Those Edinburgh photos are interesting. You can tell the camera was no D3, but it conveys the message just the same.
I visited the place once. Quite liked it!
Thank you very much.
You inspired me to link to two other Edinburgh galleries, with two other cameras. (Gawd, the number of digicams I've owned by now.)
"(Gawd, the number of digicams I've owned by now.)"
Borrow a digicam from a friend and take a photo of them all in one "family portrait". :)
Interesting observation: No matter how many digicams you already have, in order to take this photo you will always need one more! :-/
I've had my SLR's take self portraits.
I'm still pretty happy with little Canon A510. I need to take a course or somehow learn the technical aspects, though, because I'm afraid I'm not using it to its full capacity. I had a lot of fun a while back with playing with focus, though. :)
If you're interested: Bark
alex wrote: "I've had my SLR's take self portraits."
Of itself?
hannah wrote: "...bark ..."
Nice pics, Hannah. Beautiful surroundings there.
Post a Comment